I like the guy, and I think he's doing the best job he can given the current state of things, but no, he didn't deserve this award. I think he got it because of all the hype over him.

And honestly, this will give his critics more ammo. They can say he's just in it for recognition. Yes, I know he had nothing to do with the decision, but that won't stop people from twisting the situation. I was so grateful I cut off ties with that hardcore Christian because she would've called me up bright and early to ramble on and on about how this is even more proof he's the Anti-Christ.

"WTF? First they gave one to a known terrorist and head of the PLO and now this. " - ruby.

I think this is a good thing that someone in the PLO got it.Does he deserve it ? It depends on what change he was pushing and the situation he was in to do so. Right place right time to really avoid something worse ? Maybe !

If you isolate what you "Dont like" it grows, you want everyone to get along ?Reward actions you like. Nobel prizes are politics.*

Obama getting a Nobel though ? No. Yes he seems to be doing a good job at deserving one so far, perhaps after his presidency may be more appropriate,but frankly he doesnt need it to have his efforts recognised and known, many others do for efforts that would benefit more from it.

I'm going to be different and say that yes, he did totally deserve the price.

Now, I said that he deserved the price and that is my opinion, however I don't think it should have been given to him for there are people who certainly deserve it more than he does.

What I think is that he was given it as an 'encouragement' prize. So that it would be noticed that his efforts are appreciated around the world. I don't think that's how nobel should be given, but now that it's done, I hope he can make the best out of it. I just wish he could materialize those promises and hopes he has been spreading.

I noticed that she keeps using the words 'persuaded' the people of the United States to do this.. or that..

Correct me if I'm wrong.. but if you follow her logic ANYONE who gets elected president on campaign promises like that should be get the peace prize.

And a LOT of the people she sneeringly pointed out that got the prize before (if ever) achieving their ends did so under great adversity to themselves and their people. I don't see the president getting locked up, tortured or harassed.

I think it would have done Maddow better if she had pointed out that Woodrow Wilson probably did more to taint the prize than anyone after him could hope to. America and the world are still paying for the damage he dealt, and dearly. As if the Nobel prize represented some notion of perfection.

Do I think he earned it? I do believe there are others more worthy than him at this point in his carreer. I do not and should not have a say in that, however. There is an attitude in America that America is separate from the world somehow, when our very trade decisions - nevermind warfare - create and destroy empires. "Not Bush" means a lot to the world, even if it doesn't to you, and it was not an American decision.

Honestly, the vitriol and whining from 'the right' tells me more about the sorts of people in this country who do so. If the neocons want to create their own title and award, they are free to do so.

I think it would have done Maddow better if she had pointed out that Woodrow Wilson probably did more to taint the prize than anyone after him could hope to. America and the world are still paying for the damage he dealt, and dearly. As if the Nobel prize represented some notion of perfection.

Do I think he earned it? I do believe there are others more worthy than him at this point in his carreer. I do not and should not have a say in that, however. There is an attitude in America that America is separate from the world somehow, when our very trade decisions - nevermind warfare - create and destroy empires. "Not Bush" means a lot to the world, even if it doesn't to you, and it was not an American decision.

Honestly, the vitriol and whining from 'the right' tells me more about the sorts of people in this country who do so. If the neocons want to create their own title and award, they are free to do so.

Isolationism in post WW1 did a lot to taint what Wilson was trying to do. The League of Nations had no teeth due in a large part to the fact that US wasn't a member.. among other things.. but if Wilson's vision had been accepted and nutured here in the states, perhaps WW2 wouldn't have occured. He did a LOT towards peace, only to have it scuttled here in the states.

Isolationism in post WW1 did a lot to taint what Wilson was trying to do. The League of Nations had no teeth due in a large part to the fact that US wasn't a member.. among other things.. but if Wilson's vision had been accepted and nutured here in the states, perhaps WW2 wouldn't have occured. He did a LOT towards peace, only to have it scuttled here in the states.

I hate to say it, but WW2 in many ways is Britain's and France's fault. Sure there was a world-wide depression, but the aforementioned had to exact their pound of flesh from Germany and it didn't help the general goodwill of Europe. It left the wound wide open for a charismatic art school reject to find his penchant of politics.

Wilson actually suggested that Germany not pay for it, but was ignored him on that.

I hate to say it, but WW2 in many ways is Britain's and France's fault. Sure there was a world-wide depression, but the aforementioned had to exact their pound of flesh from Germany and it didn't help the general goodwill of Europe. It left the wound wide open for a charismatic art school reject to find his penchant of politics.

Wilson actually suggested that Germany not pay for it, but was ignored him on that.

And you don't think an America standing with their European Allies might not have moderated the vindicitveness of France and Britain? Instead we stuck our head in the sand for decades and were stunned to find that the axis was perfectly willing to shank us when they got the chance?

Wilson might have had the right ideas but we as a nation failed to see it then.

And you don't think an America standing with their European Allies might not have moderated the vindicitveness of France and Britain? Instead we stuck our head in the sand for decades and were stunned to find that the axis was perfectly willing to shank us when they got the chance?

Wilson might have had the right ideas but we as a nation failed to see it then.

As a nation I don't blame us for not getting caught up in European affairs, which history shows are quite nasty, but don't think we didn't try to help. The Dawes Act for example (I'm ninety percent certain that was the name of it). We paid portions of Germany's debt to help them, but that world-wide depression kind of put a damper on our philanthropy.

Now, I like Barack Obama. But considering him to be up there with Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, and Mother Theresa? Come on now. Even in terms of the other presidents, considering him up there with Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson?

I hope that Barack Obama does eventually earn his award, but the fact of the matter is, he hasn't earned it yet and there's no real practical reason he should have it. (Consider that in this year, we have Hua Jia who led a anti-communist revolt in China, Neda who died in pro-democracy revolt in Iran and Morgan Tsvangirai who finally ended the dictatorship of Mugabe in Zimbabwei.)

He's got a lot further to go before I started lauding him as a hero.

Hmm...Well I think he deserves it. If racists like Roosevelt and Wilson were nominated Obama's a much better choice.

Hmm...Well I think he deserves it. If racists like Roosevelt and Wilson were nominated Obama's a much better choice.

Being racist is one thing to frown upon, yes. But they did monumental tasks for their time that merits a Nobel Peace Prize.

On the other hand, Obama didn't really do anything amazing aside from being the first African American to be elected as President. Yet he got the Nobel Peace Prize. Why is that? Because he gave hope? Unless he actually did something that began moving the US to a peaceful time again, I don't think he deserves that prize.

So their "monumental tasks" make up for their racism and greed? Obama is the first president that isn't trying to blow up another nation, and he's trying bring harmony to the world instead of playing favorites i.e Isreal. I think that'd be enough to convience the world he deserves the prize.

The important thing to remember is that this isn't an American reward - our opinion on why or what does not matter to the committee deciding - and I think that's actually rather intentional and pointed, this time around.

What does it say about a leader whose biggest achievement is winning the Peace Prize, and not much else? Bloody hell, he's made me agree with Rush Limbaugh for the first time ever.

At least he hasn't had a chance to win it by killing as many people as Kissinger though.

If you think this award is a big accomplishment how about this. America looks ten times better than it has in previous years. When you talk to foreigners about your country you can actually not have to hear them ridicule your head of state with you unable to make any retort. He's bridged gaps with Europe and the Muslim world and he's started picking us back up out of the dumps we were in. If you think those aren't accomplishments then I don't know what to tell you.

Not being hated as much as your predecessor shouldn't be enough to qualify for the prize though. It's far too early in the man's presidency to say he's done much to further peace in the world. He took five months just to decide which puppy to get his daughters!